In the middle of the 20th century people were worried about whales.The number of whales killed worldwide came up to 66,000 per year.However,people weren't worried about the whale as an endangered animal.Instead,they were worried about the whale industry,which would disappear if there were no whales.In 1946,the International Whaling Commission was established.It limited the whale hunting for every country and controlled the whale industry.But the commission recognized that the limitation wasn't enough.They set a worldwide law against hunting whales with only two exceptions: the hunt for scientific research and "aboriginal whaling".Aboriginal whaling allows some countries to hunt a limited number of whales because it is a part of their culture.Some countries like Japan and Norway don't care about the law;they make excuses to hunt whales and sell the products.They only care about the money.

    Many fishermen complain that dolphins,also a kind of whale,steal their fish.Therefore,they kill thousands of them.In fact,this is not the truth.In reality there are so many fishermen who steal the fish from each other.Some whale hunters say that they catch the animals for scientists.They have to research what whales are eating.For that, they kill them and look into their stomach.The truth is that they only want to sell the meat.Today scientists want to observe live whales for their research.

    Many whale families are not protected and thousands of them are killed.Nobody knows if all whale families would survive,even if humans end all whale hunting today.The pollution of the oceans increases fast and the poison gets into the bodies of the animals.Many of them get sick and die.The human being has killed 90%-95% of many whale families.Others are already extinct.

    Today some international organizations try to protect whales.They make reports to explain how important and endangered whales are.Now people are becoming more interested in whales and a complete new industry has developed,whale watching,which you may want to learn about.

    Most American students go to traditional public schools. There are about 88, 000 public schools all over the US. Some students attend charter schools.

    Charter schools are self­ governing. Certain companies operate some charter schools. They are similar in some ways to traditional public schools. They receive tax money just as other public schools do. Charter schools must prove to local or state governments that their students are learning. These governments provide the schools with the agreement called a charter that permits them to operate.

    Charter schools are different because they do not have to obey most laws that govern traditional public schools. Each school can choose its own goals and decide what to teach and how to teach them in their own way. Class size is usually smaller than in traditional public schools.

    The government strongly supports charter schools as a way to re­organize public schools, which are failing to educate students. But some education unions are against charter schools. One teachers' union has just released the results of the first national study, which compared the progress of students in both traditional schools and charter schools.

    The results of the study show that charter school students performed worse on math and reading tests than the students in traditional public schools.

    Some experts say the study is not fair because students in charter schools have more problems than students in traditional schools. Other education experts say the study results would make charter school officials realize that they should help their students make greater progress .

    When I was a kid, I always used to wonder how in the world my father worked outside in the winter without a coat. It could be minus 20 degrees centigrade and there'd be Dad, removing snow, or perhaps chopping(砍) some wood — his coat thrown aside — wearing a shirt, a cap, and a pair of gloves.

    “Aren't you cold, Dad?” I'd ask. “No,” Dad would reply. “I'm not cold—working too hard to be cold.”

    Many times I wondered whether my father was an extremely tough man, or whether he was foolish.

    One time when I was quite young, perhaps five or so, I went ice fishing with Dad. It was a bright, clear day—and bitterly cold.

    After we'd been out on the ice for a little while, my feet started getting cold.

    “Daddy, my feet are cold.” I said.

    “Yeah, it's cold out here today,” he replied.

    “Tell you what,” he said. “Walk around. Make some circles in the snow. See how many different patterns you can make. That will get your feet warm.”

    I was just a little girl at the time but I remember thinking, “How in the world will walking around in the snow make my feet warm? Dad must be out of mind.”

    But he was my father, after all. I made circles in the snow. I made squares. Pretty soon I was having so much fun making patterns in the snow. I forgot about my feet being cold.

    Now, all these years later, I know, too, from personal experience how my father was able to take his coat off and work outside in the winter wearing just a shirt, a cap and gloves. Because I do it, too. “Aren't you cold?” my husband asked one winter day. “No,” I replied. “I'm not cold—working too hard to be cold.”

    I hope my husband has decided I'm both tough and smart. But I guess quite a bit of the time he thinks I'm foolish.

    Wherever Dad is on that great big farm in the sky—I'm sure he can't help but smile whenever I take my coat off while I'm working outside in the winter.

    One of the executives gathered at the Aspen Institute for a day-long leadership workshop using the works of Shakespeare was discussing the role of Brutus in the death of Julius Caesar. “Brutus was not an honorable man,” he said. “He was a traitor（叛徒）. And he murdered someone in cold blood.” The agreement was that Brutus had acted with cruelty when other options were available to him. He made a bad decision, they said—at least as it was presented by Shakespeare—to take the lead in murdering Julius Caesar. And though one of the executives acknowledged that Brutus had the good of the republic in mind, Caesar was nevertheless his superior. “You have to endeavor,” the executives said, “our policy is to obey the chain of command.”

    During the last few years, business executives and book writers looking for a new way to advise corporate America have been exploiting Shakespeare's wisdom for profitable ends. None more so than husband and wife team Kenneth and Carol Adelman, well-known advisers to the White House, who started up a training company called “Movers and Shakespeares”. They are amateur Shakespeare scholars and Shakespeare lovers, and they have combined their passion and their high level contacts into a management training business. They conduct between 30 and 40 workshops annually, focusing on half a dozen different plays, mostly for corporations, but also for government agencies.

    The workshops all take the same form, focusing on a single play as a kind of case study, and using individual scenes as specific lessons. In Julius Caesar , sly provocation（狡诈的挑唆） of Brutus to take up arms against the what was a basis for a discussion of methods of team building and grass roots organism.

Although neither of the Adelmans is academically trained in literature, the programmes, contain plenty of Shakespeare tradition and background. Their workshop on Henry V, for example, includes a helpful explanation of Henry's winning strategy at the Battle of Agincourt. But they do come to the text with a few biases (偏向): their reading of Henry V minimizes his misuse of power. Instead, they emphasize the story of the youth who seizes opportunity and becomes a masterful leader. And at the workshop on Caesar, Mr. Adelmans had little good to say about Brutus, saying “the noblest Roman of them all” couldn't make his mind up about things.

    Many of the participants pointed to very specific elements in the play that they felt related Caesar's pride, which led to his murder, and Brutus's mistakes in leading the  after the murder, they said, raise vital questions for anyone serving as a business when and how do you resist the boss?

    To be honest, I do not know Sybrina Fulton. Nor can I claim to understand the depth of her pain. Yet, we share a deep connection. A common feature experienced by those women who face the challenge of raising a Black male child in a nation that far too often views Black male bodies through fear. You see, Ms. Fulton is living my nightmare (噩梦). A constant worry that has stayed in the back of my mind since the birth of my eldest son, some sixteen years ago.

    Through the years, I have witnessed the world's reaction to my son evolve as he has grown from a small boy to a young man. In his early years, his easy smile and lovable character were nothing less than magnetic (有磁性的). Complete strangers would approach him in the street, draw him into conversation, and find themselves easily struck by his lively spirit. Even at that time I worried, how would my son react when in the years to come some of those who found themselves so impressed by this cute, intelligent boy, might grasp their purse tighter as he walked by.

    Over the years I have sought to protect his spirit from the hurt that comes from undeserved hatred. I have also sought to arm him with the knowledge that could one day save his life. He knows, for example, that if he is ever pulled over by the police, that he is to keep both hands on the wheel at all times and only reach for his license when the officer is specifically observing his actions. He knows, even in less threatening situations, that rough play and loud interactions with his buddies of any color will be viewed very differently when he does it, than when his white friends display the very same behavior. Still, the truth of the matter is, no amount of advice or voiceless behavior overcomes the physical, immovable fact of the color of his skin. His intelligence, easy smile, and lovable character won't protect him from unfounded assumptions of criminality.

    What makes the Trayvon Martin travesty (歪曲) of justice so painful to me, personally, is the knowledge that Trayvon's mother loved her baby no less than I love mine. The various pictures of moments throughout a happy childhood that have now found a home on nationwide newscasts provides clear evidence of that. Yet no amount of love and care, and no words of advice could have saved her son from the cruel killing he faced at the hands of a self-appointed neighborhood watch-dog. And perhaps even worse, nothing could have prepared her for the inhuman way her son has been treated by officials even in death. To think for three long days, his parents searched for him while officials failed to inform them of his fate and instead, performed drug and alcohol tests on his lifeless body, while failing to do the same for his attacker—the only one of the two who indeed had a criminal past is frankly, unforgivable. To know that the words of her son's killer were given more weight than eye-witnesses and taped evidence of her child's screams and eventual death must be heartbreaking. But to also have to live with the fact that his attacker still breathes free while her son lays buried underground is certainly more than any sorrowful parent should have to endure (忍受).

    It is this type of pain that is not unfamiliar to the Black experience in America, for this is the Black mothers' burden. A burden we have endured for centuries. Yet, there is still the rightful expectation, that in modern-day America, the wheels of justice would not be stopped.

    So today, it is my hope that Trayvon's mother, father, family and friends can take some comfort in the fact that millions of Americans of every color stand with them in their fight for justice. This is a burden no family should have to endure alone.

    We will not give up. We will not forget. We will continue the fight until justice is done.

    A woman was sitting by herself in a movie theatre. The movie she was about to see was a musical version (版本)of a very successful book that had sold a million copies that year.

    As the woman was waiting for the movie to begin, she noticed that the theatre was very crowded but the two seats next to her were empty.

    Suddenly a large man carrying a big fur coat walked down the aisle (走廊) and sat down, placing the fur coat on the seat next to her.

    When the lights went out, the fur coat began to move, and the woman realized it was not a coat but a large furry dog. He was sitting up in the seat, watching the movie screen with great interest. As soon as the movie started, the dog began to nod his head and beat his paws（爪） in perfect time to the music.

    When the movie was over, the woman turned to the man and said, "Excuse me, sir, but I've never seen such a well-behaved dog in a movie theatre before. Does he go to the movies often?"

    "Oh, yes," replied the man.

    "And he seemed to enjoy everything so much," she said, "It was just amazing!"

    "As a matter of fact, it surprised me, too," said the man. "He hated the book!"